Loading...
11-23-15 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, November 23, 2015. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blum, Cera, Johnson, Kluchka, Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present was Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. 1. Approval of Minutes October 26, 2015, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Waldhauser referred to the last sentence in the first paragraph on page 10 and questioned if the word "and" should be changed to the word "or." The Commissioners agreed that the word should be changed to "or." MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve the October 26, 205, minutes with the above noted correction. 2. Informal Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit— 5401-5403 Minnaqua Drive — Rakhma, Inc. — CU-141 Applicant: Rakhma, Inc. Addresses: 5401-5403 Minnaqua Drive Purpose: To allow for a Residential Facility providing care for up to 12 people in the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District. Goellner referred to a location map and stated that the applicant is proposing a Residential Facility providing care for up to 12 people in the R-1 Single Family Zoning District. She explained that a Residential Facility serving six or fewer people would be a permitted use, however, facilities serving from seven to 25 people require a Conditional Use Permit. Goellner discussed the typical number of visitors and deliveries expected and stated that the facility will have two to three staff on site at all times. She stated that the applicant is not proposing to change the footprint of the existing house or driveway, but they may add a deck, ramp and patio in the future. She referred to the parking spaces available on the property and noted that three garage spaces will be assigned to the staff and there are up to six additional parking spaces located on the driveway. She added that the applicant has agreed to put a policy in place to help with the coordination of parking and reduce the amount of on-street parking. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 2 Goellner stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Cera referred to the proposed future deck, ramp, and patio and asked if they would require variances. Goellner said no variances would be necessary. Blum referred to the plan showing the parking spaces and questioned if one of the driveway parking spaces blocks one of the garage spaces. Goellner said yes, and reiterated that there will need to be some coordination of the available spaces. She added that there is also on-street parking available. Baker asked for a summary of the neighborhood meeting. Goellner said that the applicant stated that the neighborhood meeting went well and discussion included traffic and parking. Waldhauser asked about the egress from the lower lever. Goellner said all of the bedrooms will have to have a separate egress. Johnson referred to the common area shown on the plans and asked about the definition of a duplex. Goellner explained that a duplex is two separate units. She stated that if the existing house is converted to one unit, it can never be used as a duplex again in the future. Segelbaum asked if a doorway could be installed between the units. Goellner said she would clarify that with the Building Official. Susan Eckstrom, Executive Director, Rakhma, said they are very passionate about what they do. She said they have been caring for people in single family homes for 30 years and have three other locations. Baker asked Eckstrom to talk about the other locations. Eckstrom stated that they have a home in Minnetonka with 15 residents, a home in southwest Minneapolis with 10 residents, and home in St. Paul with 10 residents. Cera asked Eckstrom about the parking. Eckstrom stated that the parking diagram shown would be unusual. She said there will always be two to three staff on site, but they often take public transit. She added that during shift times there may be at most six people on site. Waldhauser asked if the public transportation option would work in this location. Eckstrom stated that there is public transportation on Duluth Street, approximately a half a mile away. Kluchka asked about the typical turnover of the residents. Eckstrom said generally the length of time is five years. Segelbaum asked what dictates the number of people they can serve. Eckstrom said their State license requires a ratio of 1 staff to 5 residents and generally they can serve 10 people in the residential model. Segelbaum asked if square footage is considered. Eckstrom said the license considers the number of bedrooms and that the bedrooms in this location are quite large and some can accommodate two residents in each. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 3 Segelbaum asked Eckstrom if she has any concerns about the conditions listed in the staff report. Eckstrom said she has no concerns about any of the conditions. She added that they strive to be really good neighbors and that they have parking policies at all of their locations. Baker asked Eckstrom about issues regarding a single family home versus a duplex. Eckstrom said a duplex is a little less convenient for their staff. Baker asked if they are thinking about adding a door between the two units. Eckstrom said they would like a pass through. Kluchka asked Eckstrom if they considered any other properties in Golden Valley. Eckstrom said no, but they would consider additional properties in Golden Valley in the future. Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Lotti Matkovits, 2400 Unity Avenue North, said she is a retired social worker who worked primarily with seniors in independent housing. She said she is in favor of the proposal and she is impressed with their home-like atmosphere. She said when she needed to find Alzheimer's care for people there were usually no openings in Rakhma because they are known for taking public assistance and for their great care. Brenda Clarno, 6840 Winsdale Street, said she is on staff at Rakhma's Minnetonka site. She said she has heard the State demographers talk about future needs for Alzheimer's patient care. She said she thinks this community is fortunate to have facilities that do this type of work. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment. Segelbaum closed the public hearing. Cera said this is a great service to have in the community and he supports the proposal. Waldhauser agreed that there is a need for this type of facility and added that the Rakhma properties are well maintained and will be an asset to the neighborhood. Commissioners Baker and Blum agreed. Kluchka referred to the idea of having a doorway between the two units and said his recollection from past proposals is that adding a doorway turns the structure into a single family unit, and would no longer be able to be a duplex. MOVED by Cera, seconded by Baker and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit at 5401-5403 Minnaqua Drive to allow for a Residential Facility providing care for up to 12 people in the R-1 Single Family Residential zoning district subject to the following findings and conditions: Findinqs: 1. Demonstrated Need for the Proposed Use: The applicant has indicated that the market in Golden Valley would be supportive of the type of housing being proposed for this location. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The proposed residential facility use is consistent with the General Land Use Plan Map and the Comprehensive Plan. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 4 The Comprehensive Plan states that a variety of housing types and designs should be provided in order to allow for greater housing choices for Golden Valley residents. 3. Effect on Property Values: There is no evidence to support an argument that property values would be either positively or negatively affected by the presence of a residential facility in this location. Assessing staff anticipates that there will be no effect as long as the property is well maintained. 4. Effect on Traffic: The number of trips associated with the proposed use will not generate any negative traffic impacts to the surrounding areas. However, deliveries to the property should be made off-street whenever possible to mitigate short-term congestion. 5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: The proposal will increase the population at the location as compared to the previous use. This is not expected to have a negative impact. 6. Increase in Noise Levels: This use will generate slightly more noise than a typical single-family home due to regularly scheduled deliveries. However, deliveries will be limited to regular business hours. 7. Impact of Dust, Odor, or Vibration: The proposed use is not anticipated to cause an increase in dust, odor, or vibrations. 8. Impact of Pests: The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. 9. Visual Impact: The exterior of the building will remain largely unchanged with the exception of a potential deck, ramp, and walkway on the south side of the building. This addition, if built, would have minimal visual impact and would be consistent with other properties in the area. 10. Other Impacts to the City and Residents: Staff does not anticipate any other negative effects of the proposed use. The use is expected to make a positive impact on new residents of the facility. These residents are affected by Alzheimer's and other dementias and will receive 24-hour care. Conditions: 1. The plans prepared by Rehder & Associates, Inc and Carl J. Gramentz, received on October 22, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The facility may serve up to 12 persons and must maintain appropriate licensure from the State of Minnesota. 3. The applicant shall establish a Visitor and Employee Parking Policy that promotes the organized use of the driveway and attached garages to the largest extent possible in order to mitigate congestion on nearby streets. 4. Scheduled deliveries to the property must occur after 8 am on weekdays and weekends. The applicant shall encourage all delivery vehicles to park in the driveway of the property. 5. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 5 3. Informal Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit— 8836 7t'' Avenue — Calvin Christian School — CU-142 Applicant: Calvin Christian School Addresses: 8836 7th Avenue North Purpose: To allow accessory retail sales in the Light Industrial zoning district. Zimmerman explained the applicant's request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow retail sales in a portion their existing warehouse space at 8836 7th Avenue North. Currently, the applicant has a temporary sales permit which allows sales for up to 15 days per year. He added that the applicant currently operates the New to You Thriftique in the Golden Valley Shopping Center and that they plan to close that store and have sales at the 7t" Avenue location three days a week, Wednesday through Friday. Zimmerman stated that the Light Industrial Zoning District allows up to 10% of a building's footprint to be used for accessory retail sales. In this case, the warehouse and office space is 1,910 square feet and the proposed retail space will be 1,762 square feet, or approximately 3% of the building's total footprint. There are no other approved retail uses in this building. Zimmerman referred to the parking plan submitted and stated that the applicant has been assigned seven parking spaces in front of their location. He stated that the applicant's current sales draw approximately 25 customers per day, and there are typically three to six customers at a time. He added that there is no on-street parking allowed on 7t" Avenue or on Decatur Avenue North and that the applicant has stated that employees could park behind the building on sale days if needed. Zimmerman stated that staff is recommending approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Cera asked if the applicant could lease parking spaces from other tenants if needed. Zimmerman said that might be possible. Waldhauser asked why the City cares if the applicant has sales more than three days per week. Zimmerman stated that is what the applicant is proposing. He added that it might also help with managing the parking if it becomes an issue. Baker asked who owns the building. Zimmerman said he didn't know, but that the applicant is leasing space in the building. Baker said he thinks it would be up to the owner to decide if parking for the proposed use affects other tenants. Zimmerman agreed. Johnson asked what the parking requirements are for this use. Zimmerman said the Zoning Code would not require more than the seven spaces they are providing. Christine Weiss, representing the applicant, stated that their lease is up on their space in the Golden Valley Shopping Center so they've decided to scale back their operation Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 6 because they don't need that large of a retail space. She added that they operate mostly with volunteers so having sales three days a week is more manageable. Segelbaum asked Weiss if their current store at the shopping center is open more than the three days a week proposed in the new space. Weiss said their existing store is open Tuesday through Saturday from 10 to 6. Segelbaum opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Segelbaum closed the public hearing. Waldhauser stated that this proposal makes sense, she doesn't have concerns about the proposed use in this location, and she is glad they are staying in Golden Valley. MOVED by Waldhauser and seconded by Cera to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit at 8836 7th Avenue North to allow for accessory retail sales in the Light Industrial zoning district. Cera questioned if condition #3 regarding limiting the sales to three days a week needs to be included. Waldhauser said she doesn't think it needs to be included. Zimmerman stated that his only concern is if parking becomes an issue. He added that if the Commission wants to remove condition #3, staff would be ok with that. Segelbaum stated that if sales were over a period of five days instead of three it might help distribute customers over a longer period of time and make parking less of an issue. Johnson said he thinks if the applicant is asking to have sales three days a week the City should give them what they've asked for, and it is not their place to second guess the applicant. Baker said the applicant didn't actually ask to have sales three days a week, they just mentioned in their narrative that they would like to have sales three days a week. MOVED by Cera to amend the motion to remove condition #3 regarding limiting the sales to three days a week. Waldhauser accepted the amendment subject to the following findings and conditions. Findinqs: 1. Demonstrated Need for the Proposed Use: The City requires that an applicant identify a market for the proposed good or service necessitating a CUP. Calvin Christian School will be relocating their existing retail use, the New to You Thriftique, from the Golden Valley Shopping Mall and is able to accurately predict the expected amount of retail demand based on their current customer base. 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: A warehouse use with a retail component is consistent with the Light Industrial designation of this property on the General Land Use Plan Map. 3. Effect on Property Values: Staff anticipates the new use would have no impact on the surrounding property values. 4. Effect on Traffic: The number of trips associated with the proposed use is minimal and staff does not expect any negative traffic impacts to the surrounding areas. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 7 5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: The proposed use may generate a minor increase in the number of employees at the location three days a week. 6. Increase in Noise Levels: The proposed use is not anticipated to cause an increase in noise levels. 7. Impact of Dust, Odor, or Vibration: The proposed use is not anticipated to cause an increase in dust, odor, or vibrations. 8. Impact of Pests: The proposed use is not anticipated to attract pests. 9. Visual Impact: Because the proposed use would involve only interior modifications, staff does not anticipate a change in the visual quality of the property. 10. Other Impacts to the City and Residents: Staff does not anticipate any other negative effects of the proposed use. The location is a multi-tenant light industrial property with adequate parking to serve the individual uses. Conditions: 1. The plans by submitted by the applicant on November 9, 2015, shall become a part of this approval. 2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from Fire Chief John Crelly, dated November 16, 2015, shall become part of this approval. 3. fn the event complaints to the City regarding parking are deemed by the City Manager or his/her designee to be significant, the City reserves the right to require signage be installed to highlight the existing seven parking spaces in the front parking lot and to reserve them for customer use. 4. All signage must meet the requirements of the City's Sign Code (Section 4.20). 5. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local ordinances, regulations, or laws with authority over this development. 4. Site Plan Review— Borton Volvo — 905 Hampshire Avenue South Zimmerman stated that construction projects in the I-394 Zoning District require site plan review by the Planning Commission. He explained Volvo's proposal to upgrade and standardize their look and discussed the development standards required including: building placement, building design, transparency, building entrances, building materials, building colors, parking location, parking screening, pedestrian circulation, and public art. He noted that there are some items in this proposal that do not completely comply with the Code requirements, however, there is language in the Code that states "the City may permit alternative approaches that, in its determination, meet the intent of the development standards equally well or when specific physical conditions of the site or building would make compliance infeasible or inappropriate." Segelbaum asked if the parts of the building labeled "A" in the presentation are being removed. Zimmerman stated that approximately half of the existing building will be torn down and replaced. Zimmerman stated that staff believes the building materials proposed are high quality, but that the following items do not completely comply with the Zoning Code requirements: Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 8 1. Windows occupy roughly 50% of the ground floor farade rather than the 60% threshold required. The upper fa�ade of the showroom does not contain windows or balconies. 2. The entrance to the building is located adjacent to the side parking lot rather than at the building front. 3. No limestone is included in the proposed street fa�ade materials. Staff believes this standard is not compatible with the design required by the Volvo corporate office. 4. While some landscaping is proposed, full parking lot screening is not included in the proposal. Staff believes full parking lot screening is not compatible with the function of an auto dealership. 5. A public sidewalk is not proposed along the street frontage. Staff believes a sidewalk should not be required as it is not included in the City's Sidewalk Plan. Kluchka asked about the location of the existing pedestrian bridge in relation to the subject property and discussed the existing sidewalks in the area. He questioned if there are enough or if more are needed. Zimmerman explained that the City has a Sidewalk Committee and they review the sidewalk plan in order to fill in gaps where sidewalks are needed. Patrick Sutter, General Manager, Borton Volvo, stated that this store opened in 1999. He explained that Volvo refers to the design as the Volvo Retail Experience (VRE) and the new design is very Scandinavian with an open floor plan/living room concept. He said the existing facility is dated and they are not proposing to create a mega store, they are looking to add a comfortable amount of square footage and to create a more accommodating drive area. Cera asked Sutter if they own the building to the north and if so, are there any plans to change the fa�ade of that building as well. Sutter said they do own the building to the north and they did some exterior remodeling to it when they purchased it in 2007, but they are not planning to make any changes to it at this time. Waldhauser noted that the building is two stories in height, but is really one story in the interior. Sutter agreed and said the height will help screen the mechanicals on the roof. Steven Fichtel, Architect for the project, stated that the architectural design was done by Volvo architects and he is primarily helping with construction documents and project administration. He stated that they are planning a small, second level office area across a portion of the eastern part of the showroom. Kluchka asked if that space is shown in the elevations. Fichtel said yes, and noted that there will be a couple of windows facing north. He added that the north fa�ade of the building will be half glass and half Alucobond panels. Kluchka asked if electric charging stations, or wind or solar power will be included. Sutter said yes, there will be three charging stations and they are contemplating adding a solar canopy in the future, as well as using LED lighting. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 9 Kluchka asked for a description of the glass and the visible light transmission values. Fichtel explained that there will be etching on the inside of the glass units which will help control glare but they will be translucent to let daylight into the building. He noted that the blue sections shown on the plans will be blue glass and will provide a glow at night. Kluchka asked if the glass is opaque or transparent. Sutter said it is opaque. Fichtel added that shadows can be seen through the etched glass. Kluchka asked about the landscape plans. Fichtel said there is a very specific palette of materials they will be using including: broom and pebbled concrete finishes, river rock outside of the windows with low growing junipers in front, and tall grasses and birch trees in the vehicle display area on the south. Waldhauser said the landscape plan is very stark and asked if it would be outside of their design standards to soften the fa�ade of the building to make it more people friendly. Sutter stated that they will be using natural wood in the entryway and around the window areas to make it inviting and warm. Kluchka asked if there will be shrubs with pylons buried within them, placed around the property lines to help address security issues similar to what the MINI dealership did on their property. Sutter said they haven't had to gate their parking lot and they like to keep the lot well lit. He added that they are planning on keeping the existing flower beds and tall grasses that are there now. Kluchka asked if the roof parapet will screen all of the HVAC equipment and if people driving by will be able to see it. Fichtel said the new building is quite a bit taller and sits fairly close to the street. He added that the mechanical units will be in the center, toward the back of the roof. Kluchka said he is concerned about the building not having a complete parapet and it looking like there is a fake fa�ade. Fichtel said the building will have a full parapet. Segelbaum asked the applicant to address the five items that do not completely comply with the Zoning Code requirements. The first one being the ground floor windows occupying 50%, rather than 60% of the ground floor fa�ade. Fichtel said that the schematic design was done by Volvo designers and they say how the building can comply best with the design concept. Sutter added that the ground floor is all glass, it is just not all completely see-through glass. Segelbaum said the second item that does not completely comply with the Zoning Code requirements is that the entrance to the building is located adjacent to the side parking lot rather than the building front. He asked if there are any doors on the Hampshire side of the property. Fichtel stated that the primary entry faces south as does the existing entrance and the customer parking. He noted that they have added another entrance on the north side of the building and there are two display windows on the west. He also explained that the Building Code would require air lock vestibules at all entries and they need to be able to get the vehicles onto the showroom floor. Waldhauser stated that the vision for the I-394 corridor was to be pedestrian friendly with sidewalks, but that doesn't make sense in this case. Also, there is no need for a door on the Hampshire side of the property. Sutter added that what they are proposing is more pedestrian friendly. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 10 Segelbaum said the third item that does not comply with the Zoning Code requirements is the fact that no limestone is included in the proposed street fa�ade materials. He noted that limestone is not compatible with the design required by the Volvo. Segelbaum referred to the fourth requirement regarding landscaping and said he thinks there has been some precedence regarding landscaping at dealerships. Segelbaum referred to the last item regarding sidewalks and asked the applicant if he would consider adding a sidewalk along the street frontage. Sutter stated that he hasn't commented on sidewalks in the past, but he doesn't see a lot of pedestrian traffic in the area. Segelbaum said there is a path through the wooded area on the Laurel Avenue Greenbelt, but it would be good to have more sidewalks in this area. Waldhauser asked if the roof could accommodate a green roof design. Fichtel said he thinks it's conceivable if it is designed that way by engineers. Waldhauser said it would be nice since there is no tree cover, shade, or infiltration. Blum questioned who would have access to the charging stations. Sutter said they could be accessed by anybody wanting to use them. Johnson asked about the site lighting. Zimmerman said a lighting plan will be reviewed during the building permit process. Kluchka said he would like to discuss alternatives for the five items not meeting the requirements of the Zoning Code. The Commissioners agreed that the amount of windows proposed is fine because high quality glass and materials are being used. The Commissioners also agreed that it is ok that the entrance to the building is located adjacent to the side parking lot rather that at the front of the building and that limestone is not being used. Segelbaum asked why this proposal is not a PUD. Zimmerman explained that it is an existing building on an existing lot. The applicant has a Conditional Use Permit and the property meets all of the setback, height, and size requirements and doesn't require any variances. The only requirement is this site plan review process. Kluchka said he would like to list findings of what alternative standards the Planning Commission is going to allow because this property is part of the Mixed Use Zoning District and it doesn't require review by the City Council. Baker said he is confused by the word "alternative" and would like to use a different word. Kluchka stated that the Code uses the language "alternate approach" and the Planning Commission is being asked to justify the proposed design using an alternative standard. Blum said he doesn't know if the Planning Commission is departing from the standards, they are meeting the standard that allows for flexibility. Segelbaum summarized the five items not meeting the requirements of the Zoning Code and reiterated that they've discussed the amount of windows, the use of Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 11 limestone, the entrance located on the side rather than in the front, the landscaping, and the lack of a public sidewalk along the street frontage. Johnson stated that Volvo has spent a lot of time and effort to figure out this proposal and that they are using the best standards. He said the City may be making some exceptions, but it is getting a showplace based on a lot of analysis and study. Cera said that is good in this case, but varying from the requirements can be trouble like in the Menard's proposal. Kluchka agreed and said franchise architecture can be fantastic but it can also be Walmart, Menard's and McDonald's, so he'd be more comfortable saying that he approves of Volvo's proposed design because of its high quality materials and design. Segelbaum asked the Commissioners how they felt about the proposed landscaping. Waldhauser said she thinks the applicant's rationale about not wanting to screen their display windows is good. She added that the applicant is planning on keeping some of the existing landscaping which is also good, but she would like to add a condition that three dimensional landscaping be added to soften the look. Kluchka agreed that the proposed landscaping is adequate for a car dealership and he thinks the goal is to get additional landscaping where it doesn't obscure views of inventory. Segelbaum suggested additional landscaping on the west and north sides. Segelbaum asked the Commissioners how they felt about the requirement regarding sidewalks. Kluchka said he feels additional sidewalks are not necessary because it is not part of the existing sidewalk plan. Blum added that there are defined areas already in place and the property is bounded by walkable paths. The Commissioners discussed the various sidewalks and crosswalks in the area. Baker said he is concerned about the lighting and the "glowing box." He asked if there are ordinances that might address the impact to night flying birds and other wildlife, or if that is beyond the scope of this project. Zimmerman stated that the Code considers more general types of impacts. MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve the proposed site plan for Borton Volvo at 905 Hampshire Avenue South with the following considerations for alternative approaches for the five items that do not comply with the Zoning Code requirements: 1. Windows — The alternative approach includes additional windows on the second floor as well as the translucence of the fa�ade of the main building. 2. Building Entrance — The south side of building is the front as a precedent and the front of the building is difficult to define according to the sidewalk. 3. Building materials —The alternative approach includes high quality glass farade, use of national high quality design standards, and consistent materials being used on the "glass box" all the way around, including on the east elevation. 4. Parking screening/landscaping — Landscaping is not necessarily appropriate for a car dealer's sales needs and incorporates some additional safety qualities, however, the Commission is requiring additional three-dimensional plantings. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 12 5. Public sidewalk —A public sidewalk is not necessary because there is no sidewalk included in the City's Sidewalk Plan. --Short Recess-- 5. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings Baker gave an update on the METRO Blue Line (Bottineau) LRT. He stated that the City Council submitted comments to the Corridor Management Committee (CMC) and the Committee supported both proposed stations. He noted that there are still concerns about parking and Sochacki Park being repaired when the project is complete. Zimmerman stated that Municipal Consent will be in February. He explained that the project is at 15% level of design now, it will be at 30% in August, 60% in the spring, and 100% at the end of 2017 with construction in 2018. 6. Other Business • Council Liaison Report No report was given. • Comprehensive Plan Process Overview Zimmerman referred to the staff report included in the agenda packet that provided several links to other cities' Comprehensive Plans in order for the Planning Commissioners to start reviewing and comparing Golden Valley's Plan. In his staff report he also asked the Commissioners to review the goals listed in each chapter of the City's current Comprehensive Plan, to think about which chapters might need significant changes or updates, and if Golden Valley should complete the optional elements (Economic Competitiveness and Resilience) as suggested by the Metropolitan Council. He discussed the timing of the Comprehensive Plan update process and explained that the City Council will be discussing the scope of the Plan in February or March. Segelbaum asked when the last Comprehensive Plan update was done. Zimmerman said the last update was approved in 2009. Waldhauser stated that she likes the plans that have an overall theme and tie the sections together similar to St. Louis Park's and Roseville's plans. Zimmerman noted that Roseville's plan has different goals for different Planning Districts in their city. Baker said having different goals for different parts of the City might be good as a result of the subdivision moratorium and the feelings of people in those areas. Segelbaum asked if there is training available. Zimmerman said staff has been discussing more regular Commissioner training with specific topics. He added that staff is also considering having a kick-off meeting with the Planning Commission, Minutes �f the Golden Valley Planning Commission November 23, 2015 Page 13 Environmental Commission, and Open Space and Recreation Commission at the beginning of next year and he would send the Commissioners a link to the Metropolitan Council's on-line tools and examples. Baker suggested not cancelling future Planning Commission meetings when there are no agenda items so they can seriously start working on the Comprehensive Plan Update. He added that he thinks a Resilience chapter is very important and something he will advocate for and not dismiss. Blum said he would like the language in the Comprehensive Plan to be stronger around development near light rail transit stations so there aren't problems in the future when figuring out development near light rail stations. Baker agreed and added that light rail stations in different areas would have very different needs. Zimmerman suggesting having focus areas. Waldhauser said she thinks the City's current Comprehensive Plan is backward thinking and she would like it to be more diverse. Kluchka agreed that a lot of the language in the curr�nt Plan is historical and it might be valuable to update the Envision documents or move away from the Envision documents as a basis for the next update. Zimmerman agreed that the goals need to be reviewed to see how they need to be changed or interpreted. Blum said he would like to see some statistics on how the numbers will change in housing, etc., to help figure out the goals and how things have changed in the last five or 10 years. 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:48 pm. . ��� • In ( r �'��� U V 6::...._...._ John Kluc ka, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant